Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/11201/2025 of JATINDER SINGH AULAKH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 27 July 2026
of 2025(O&M) -2- petitioner, at the behest of Gurpreet Singh Gopi and his brother Harpeet Singh Happy, who were both residing abroad and had employed contract killers to get petitioner eliminated. Said Gurpreet Singh Gopi and Harpreet Singh Happy had links with gangsters and were involved
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
REEMA SAINI
CRWP-11201 of 2025(O&M)
petitioner, at the behest of Gurpreet Singh Gopi and his brother Harpeet Singh Happy, who were both residing abroad and had employed contract killers to get petitioner eliminated. Said Gurpreet Singh Gopi and Harpreet Singh Happy had links with gangsters and were involved in criminal activities. FIR No.002 dated 03.01.2024 was also registered with regard to assault on the petitioner. On another occasion, FIR No. 0135 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 323, 126(2), 324, 351(2) of BNS, 2023, was registered in Police Station City Gurdaspur, regarding attack upon the petitioner by Panthpreet Singh son of Baljit Singh. Petitioner who was a whistle blower, frequently visited crime scenes and other spots for gathering news and also took his daughter to school and tuition. Security provided to the petitioner was arbitrarily withdrawn on 26.08.2025 without assessing threat to life and liberty of the petitioner. Respondents were approached through representation Annexure P-4 but no action was taken.
3. Status report by way of affidavit of Shahbaz Singh, PPS Deputy Superintendent of Police, Command Sub-Division, City, District Gurdaspur, filed is taken on record.
4. Learned State counsel submits that an inquiry was conducted into the matter by SHO, Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur, who reported that there was no threat to the petitioner from the private respondents, yet directions were issued to SHO Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner. REEMA SAINI
CRWP-11201 of 2025(O&M)
5. Pursuant to attacks on the petitioner, 3 FIRs were registered in the year 2023 and 2024 and at that time, he was given security by the State. Though, it is the duty of the State to protect the life and liberty of its citizens, security is to be provided only where threat is perceived. After conducting due inquiry and assessing the threats, the SHO Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur, has perceived no threat to life and liberty of the petitioner. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to refer to any recent instance or mishap endangering petitioner’s life and liberty. Security at the costs of State exchequer cannot be granted on mere asking. Therefore, there is no ground to issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No. 2 to 5 to restore the personal security guards earlier attached with the petitioner.
6. Petition stands disposed of. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL)
JUDGE 27.07.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No REEMA SAINI